[sometime lurker]

Butter, I don’t think we’re going to agree on this until I hear from someone who really understands state law. If the statute says you can’t even look at the records without the proper qualifications, then the older rules saying you can have a noncertified copy seem suspect to me - I’d expect the more restrictive statute to be followed. If any of the lawyers would like to chime in, I’d love to hear an opinion. I know when hospitals are faced with what appears to be a conflict, they often err on restricting information, even absurdly sometimes.

As I said, proof that a noncertified COLB was issued between 1977 and 2008 would be very convincing.

[sometime lurker]

And now to all, a good day. I’m for wrapping presents and distributing cookies to the neighbors for the rest of the day. Merry Christmas!

[butterdezillion]

The two people from the Ombudsman’s Office that signed off on the e-mail response to me don’t really understand state law?

You could ask the OIP; they are supposed to interpret the disclosure laws. But I already did that and they said the HDOH gets to interpret the law. So I don’t know who you’re going to find that “really understands state law”. The Ombudsman and the HDOH disagree, and the OIP refuses to weigh in. The AG’s office has never even responded to any of my e-mails.

That by itself should tell you something.

[Lurking Libertarian]

If the statute says you can’t even look at the records without the proper qualifications, then the older rules saying you can have a noncertified copy seem suspect to me - I’d expect the more restrictive statute to be followed. If any of the lawyers would like to chime in, I’d love to hear an opinion.

I'm a lawyer, albeit not admitted in Hawaii. But the rule everywhere I've ever looked is that statutes always trump regulations if they're inconsistent, and that is doubly true if the statute was passed after the regulation.